In her twelve play-cycle on the life of Christ titled The Man Born to be King , Dorothy L. Sayers (DLS) reconciled four gospels into a single coherent script that captivated over two million listeners in its 1940 radio broadcast.  Such a remarkable feat might have only been achieved by a great mystery writer who could put the facts surrounding several accounts of the Christ story into one believable "case." A master of detective fiction, Sayers left behind many clues as to her creative method.  Studying the essays surrounding the radio play such as The Greatest Drama Ever Staged, The Dogma is the Drama, her introductory essay to The Man Born to be King and character and directorial notes within the published manuscript, insight may be drawn into Sayers remarkable achievement, as well as the dramatic technique and theories of religious drama in the Modern period.

For Sayers, the "Greatest Drama Ever Staged" was the life, death and resurrection of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. In her essay by that same title, DLS expresses great concern over the common sentiment that Christian theology is a "dull dogma." For Sayers, the opposite held true stating, "the Christian faith is the most exciting drama that ever staggered the imagination of man --  and the dogma is the drama" (Christian Letters to a Post-Christian World, 13).  The dogma, as confessed in the creeds of the Church, told the story of a time when "God was the underdog and got beaten, when he submitted to the conditions He had laid down and became a man like the men He had made, and the men He had made broke him and killed him" (Christian Letters, 15).  To this DLS asked, "If this is so dull, what in Heaven's name is worthy to be called exciting?"  Sayers attributed society's ambivalence toward the dogma to complacency, religious sentimentality and a lack of understanding toward the Creeds.  While Creeds were recited daily in Mass, the droning rote of most congregations discounted the dramatic life, death and resurrection of the Christ they were professing.  Christ, Sayers argued, was not the "dull" character that "later generations" would "muffle" in "an atmosphere of tedium."  On the contrary, Sayers argued that "the people who hanged Christ never, to do them justice, accused him of being a bore....they thought him too dynamic to be safe...they objected to him as a firebrand" (Christian Letters, 15).  In order to rectify the misnomer of "dull dogma," Sayers took it as a personal  mission to "drag out the Divine Drama from under the dreadful accumulation of slipshod thinking and trashy sentiment heaped upon it, and set it on an open stage to startle the world into some sort of vigorous reaction" (Christian Letters, 26). By dramatizing the life of Christ, Sayers hoped to shock the pious and earn the respect of the heathen so that God might not die in the complacency and skepticism of the Modern age. 

Sayers' dramatic technique was grounded in the Christian dogma. She asserted that theology was the framework upon which religious drama could be built providing it met two conditions: first, it must be a "complete theology" and secondly, the dramatist must shed any edificatory or theological intentions in telling the story (Man Born to be King, 3-4).  Fond of saying the "dogma is the drama," Sayers used Christian theology as the "grammar and vocabulary of her art." She distinguished this, however, from treating dogma as the end toward which her work was directed. The dogma provided an outline for the story, but a dramatist must avoid "edificatory" or "theological" intentions in writing "a good piece of theatre."  Instead, "it is the business of the dramatist not to subordinate the drama to the theology, but to approach the job of truth -- telling from his own end, and trust the theology to emerge undistorted from the dramatic presentation of the story" (MBTBK, 4). Sayers' drama, therefore, although dependent upon the Christian dogma, did not present itself with the intent of proclaiming theology, but strove to tell the story from which theology emerged.  DLS believed the best way to test a theology was through dramatization.  She wrote, "there is no more searching test of a theology than to submit it to dramatic handling; nothing so glaringly exposes inconsistencies in character, a story or philosophy as to put it upon the stage and allow it to speak for itself" (MBTBK, 3). To dramatize the story of the Christ through a Realistic and unbiased eye was, therefore, to test the dogma and reveal its truths.  For Sayers, there was no better affirmation of the dogma than its dramatization.

Dramatization began for Sayers in the "scandal of particularity." This commitment to "particularity" was consistent with Historical Realistic drama versus the abstractions of  liturgical or symbolic religious drama.  Sayers asserted that the "writer of Realistic Gospel plays" had to "display the words and actions of actual people engaged in living through a piece of recorded history...a series of events that took place at a particular point in time.  And the people of that time had not the faintest idea that it was happening" (MBTBK, 5). Characters could no longer be "sacred personages" with "symbolic attitudes" as frequently presented in interpretations of the scripture.  Instead, the true motivations  behind each character must be explored in light of their circumstances. Sayers wrote, 
 

 We are so much accustomed to viewing the whole story from a post-Resurrection, and indeed from a post-Nicene point of view, that we are apt...to attribute too all of the New Testament characters the same kind of detailed theological awareness that we have ourselves.  We judge their behavior as though all of them...had known Whom they were dealing with....But they did not know it....if Herod the Great had ordered his famous massacre with the express intention of doing away with God--then [he] would have been diabolically wicked....And, indeed, we would like to think that they were: it gives us a reassuring sensation that 'it can't happen here (MBTBK, 6). 

It is just this kind of complacency that Sayers attempted to "shock" out of her audience.  By depicting the life and times of Jesus realistically and objectively, Sayers was able to reveal, like any good detective, the human motives that lied behind the heinous crime of killing the Messiah and in doing so revealed that "God was executed by people painfully like us."   For Sayers, "the swiftest way to produce the desirable sense of shock is the use of modern speech and a determined historical realism about the characters" (MBTBK, 7).  Sayers cites Herod and other as examples: "Herod the Great was no monstrous enemy of God, he was a soldier of fortune and political genius....Pontius Pilate was a provincial governor...terrified ...of questions in the House, commissions of inquiry and what may be generically called "Whitehall". Ciaphas was the ecclesiastical politician, appointed, like one of Hitler's bishops....As for the Elders of the Synagogue, they are to be found on every Parish Council -- always highly respectable, often quarrelsome, and sometimes in a crucifying mood" (MBTBK, 7).  By remaining true to the "historical realism" of Jesus' time, but taking poetic license to "give the modern equivalent of contemporary speech and manners," Sayers shocked the audience into realizing that yes, the crucifixion of Christ could happen in the modern age and that "We  played the parts in that tragedy, nineteen and a half centuries since, and perhaps are playing them today, in the same good faith and in the same ironic ignorance" (MBTBK, 8).  Through her technique of using modern language and characterization in an ancient setting, Sayers was both truthful to the historical realism of the text, while being relevant and revelatory to the modern audience.

Throughout her manuscript, Sayers takes great pains to maintain her technique of characterization. Characters were given specific English dialects with which to speak their lines.  Jesus, His Mother , John and Judas were to speak in Standard English, while the other disciples and the multitudes were to speak in "rougher" or Cockney dialects.  This further enabled the audience to identify with the characters and characters whose equivalents may be present in the modern age. Every play was also accompanied by pages of character analysis in order to create the "they know not what they do" aura about her plays.  Sayers constantly reminded the actor that Jesus was "the Lion of Judah," not "meek and mild,"  that his opponents were continually justified in their day and that the disciples were consistently doubtful or unaware of Christ's true identity as the Messiah.  Sayers was also consistent with the Realistic movement of theatre in that characters were portrayed as humanistic whose decisions were largely determined by social factors rather than through the morality or immorality of one's character. In this way, Sayers achieved a sense of suspense and urgency as she was so successful in doing in her mystery novels and prevented her "dogma" from becoming "dull." 

Aside from creating realistic and relevant characterizations, Sayers was also confronted with the dramaturgical challenge of condensing four gospels.  The playwright herself admitted that "the books are, on the whole, far better known as a collection of disjointed texts and moral aphorisms wrenched from their context than as a coherent history made up of coherent episodes" (MBTBK, 2).  Sayers then strove to "dovetail"  or harmonize the different accounts of the gospel.  She wrote that what the playwright must do is "take three or four accounts of the same incident, differing in detail, and to dovetail all these details so that the combined narrative presents a more convincing and dramatic picture than ny of the accounts taken separately" (MBTBK, 19). In doing so, Sayers found what were at first apparent contradictions as really "supplementary."  For instance, Sayers was able to make the several Resurrection appearances at the Sepulcher into a chronological whole.  Sayers method focused on using the Gospel of St. John for chronology.  Sayers found that it was generally John who knew details such as "the time of year, the time of day, where people sat, and how they got from one place to another" (MBTBK, 17-18). Sayers then filled in the gaps left by John, usually events which John assumes "everyone knew by heart" such as the Birth story, the Temptation, Parables and the words of the Eucharist with details from the other Gospels.  Where several parables are repeated either identically or with variations, the playwright chose one account for the sake of brevity. 

The story of the Feeding of the Five Thousand provides a good illustration of Sayers' technique. Here, Sayers identifies a troubling question or a gap in the stories provided by Matthew, Mark and John:
 

The Synoptists say that Jesus 'constrained His disciples...to go before Him on the other side while He sent the multitudes away.  But why?  ...If He could disperse the crowds by merely telling them to go home, what was the point in sending the disciples ahead?  Simply in order that He might stage a perfectly unnecessary display of miraculous water-walking?  That would be most unlike Him--He never did superfluous miracles for fun . 

St. John has got it right as usual.  He says, almost in so many words, that Jesus gave the crowds the slip: 'He departed' (John VI.15) because they wanted to seize Him and make Him king. The people obviously followed the disciples down to the shore, since John says (VI.22) that they 'saw that Jesus went not with His disciples into the boat' -- ad how could they have seen that, unless they were there at the time?....Allowing for John's flashback methods, the thing is perfectly clear.  The people went down to the shore; they saw the disciples into the boat, and only then realized that Jesus wasn't with them.  Therefore, something has previously led them to believe that jesus was with them, or they wouldn't have followed the disciples at all -- they didn't want to make kings of them. The boat presumable put off a little way, and then hung about waiting for Jesus to turn up.  But He didn't come -- no doubt because the crowds were still on the shore -- so, seeing that it was getting dark, and a nasty storm coming, the disciples gave it up as a bad job and started to cross (VI.17). Then when the crowds had gone...Jesus came to the shore, observed that the oarsmen had gotten into difficulties, and followed them across the Lake.  Taken like that, it all makes perfect sense.

The only question is: Why did the crowds imagine that Jesus had gone down to the boat with the disciples?  Presumable they mistook somebody else for Him -- at any rate, that is the suggestion I have made, and the "head shawl" provides a 'machinery' for their mistake (MBTBK, 124)
 

While the Gospels supply the incidents of Sayers' plot, she displays an awareness that her play must be more than simply an "interminable Scripture lesson," but required a theme structure with a central dramatic conflict.  For this, Sayers chose an "aspect of the story which was bound to loom large in the minds of both writer and audience at this moment: its bearing upon the nature of earthly and spiritual kingdoms" (MBTBK, 14).  The conflict of Sayers' play, how the King of a spiritual kingdom could survive in an earthly Roman empire, paralleled the modern question of God's place in the modern age of political and world crisis.  Sayers chooses then, not to center her plot around Christ, but Judas. Catherine Kenney in The Remarkable Case of Dorothy Sayers develops the characterization of Judas as a literary tool in his foiling to Jesus and the fictional character Baruch (236-240). It is a topic that Sayers also treats clearly in her notes for the play. It is Judas, like the modern audience, who must wrestle with the question, "What think ye of Christ?" Judas serves as a "tie-rod" throughout the incidents of thethe incidents of the play in order to secure the plot to "political intrigue" and to emphasize both the ancient and modern conflict of the place of the spiritual kingdom among the earthly kingdom of government and politics (MBTBK 14). In addition to observations of character, the Baruch-Judas relationship served Sayers' dramatic structure. In defending her plot-structure , Sayers cites an example of invention essential to the "plot-machinery."  This example once again illustrates Sayers' mixture of Historical Realism and artistic liberty:
 

[P]lot structure...was provided by bringing out certain implications in the story and centering them around the character of Judas. The unexplained incident of the ass and the pass-word...as it stands in the text, is unlike anything else in the Gospels, and appears to need something more to account for it than deliberate, and rather theatrical 'staging' by Jesus of a fulfillment of prophecy....I have suggested a reason, using for this purpose the character of Baruch the Zealot -- the only main character of any importance who is of my own invention.  His connection with Judas supplies the main-spring of the plot-machinery (MBTBK, 14).

There is a major puzzle in this story, viz.: the mysterious readiness of the "ass's colt" for the Entry into Jerusalem.  I don't believe Jesus was making a sort of stage-managed parade in order to fulfill a prophecy.  I mean, I can't see Him going to somebody and saying in conspiratorial tones, 'I want you to have a donkey ready for me tomorrow, so that I can make a spectacular entry into the city in order to conform with what Zachariah laid down.' It wouldn't be like him -- and the fulfillment of a prophecy isn't a fulfillment if somebody does it on purpose.  I think the arrangement was made and the password devised, by somebody else, and for another reason; somebody asked for a sign and was given a sign -- and the prophecy was fulfilled in a perfectly natural way, and so was really fulfilled (MBTBK, 197).

JUDAS: His hypocrisy is nauseating.  He preaches God's Kingdom and the way of purification -- and all the time he has been plotting to destroy the soul of Isreal....I have evidence.  Baruch the Zealot is waiting in the hills with a thousand spearman.  Last night he sent a messenger to Jesus.  The answer was: 'Tell Baruch I will give him the sign.' Today there was an ass ready and waiting -- and the password arranged beforehand.  On Baruch's ass Jesus role into Jerusalem, in the midst of a crowd openly hailing him as Messiah....Yes. Jesus has proclaimed was against Jerusalem...I heard him.  He said: 'Because you would not accept me when I cam in peace, you shall be beseiged and destroyed, and not one stone left standing.'....God meant for him to be the Messiah.  He was the Messiah, if only he had been true to himself....Yet he has lowered himself to the measure of little minds, eating the applause of the ignorant, and bartering his birthright for the mess of pottage which he despises even while his mouth waters at the thought of it (MBTBK, 221)

Dorothy L. Sayers provides a dramaturgical model for modern scholars to study the relationship of the religious playwright to the larger theatrical movements such as Realism during the Modern period. Detailed notes and essays regarding the use of dogma and the Christian aesthetic reveal how dramatists reconciled Historical Realism, biblical truth, and poetic license into dramatic adaptations of scripture. Testing her dogma through the dramatic genre, Sayers examines the inconsistencies or questions of scripture through a humanistic portrayal of the story of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. True to the story, the political period of the time and human motivation, Sayers' allows a theology to emerge from the dogma that is no longer complacent, but allows "every man to see his own face" in the scripture.